dum wrote:plantaginate wrote:dum wrote:
I haven't fully stated with empirical results...because as I said I don't care if you believe me or not.
lol nice copout,
dum wrote:
Besides..that I'm not an electronic engineer has no bearing on the truthfulness of my beliefs.
gold. so you have no intellectual basis whether or not what you're being spun is the truth or not?
No cop out, my initial statement was all I was prepared to offer on the matter as far as arguing the point goes. you weren't convinced and that's A-OK with me. This current exchange isn't about me proving anything, it's about you insisting I prove something and me saying I don't care if you believe me or not. And round and round.
damn. all i ever wanTed was someone to tell me that "one track = one core"
don't any of "you" get that?
dum wrote:
Intellectual basis ? I have no electronic engineering background if that's what you're getting at ? But back around 2006 when these discussions were taking place more often (seems you've been living under a rock)
gold. just point me to the discussions mate, thats all i want to know
dum wrote:
I took the claims on board despite having no...ahem...'intellectual basis' (jerkoff-smiley.gif) to verify how plausible those claims were, and in practise they matched up with my experience. one track = one core. Certainly with ableton live. So I accepted what was being said by the devs as truth.
so basically your saying you have no idea but what ever anyone tells you that sounds at least slightly plausible is A-OK by cos fuck no one else has told you different?
[/quote]
jesus, how hard can it be?
it's generally accepted that the CPU distribution per track equates to
ONE-TRACK = ONE-CORE
Everyone seems to swear by this but no one can offer any evidence from any DAW producers that this is the case?